RE: issue-170

I thought we had previously agreed to remove terms like "comprehensively" as they are highly subjective.  "Clear" should be more than enough as it embodies that the fullness of a concept was appropriately conveyed for it to be "clear" (and carries enough ambiguity on its own).

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Ninja Marnau [] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 8:29 AM
To: Mike O'Neill;; 'Jack Hobaugh'
Subject: Re: issue-170

Mike, I updated your proposal in the wiki.

Jack, do you think the text proposal is now more balanced for DNT;0 and UGE?


Am 04.06.14 14:38, schrieb Mike O'Neill:
> If a 1st Party receives a request with DNT:0 set then data regarding the user MAY be used or shared but, if the header signal resulted from an explicitly-granted exception, only for the purposes that were clearly and comprehensively explained when the exception was granted.

Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 15:35:07 UTC